WBCCI New Constitution

[mbmbstreamer]

Constructive input.

The GA Unit will submit a detailed set of changes at the Delegates Meeting. It includes MAL voting rights and the DENCO amendment. I will be happy to provide a copy to any Unit who wants to move FORWARD and attempt to craft a document which CAN be approved. The committee and club have spent far too much time on this effort to dismiss it without an attempt at passage.

PM me if you want a copy.

[Nuvite-F]

Originally Posted by mbmbstreamer

The GA Unit will submit a detailed set of changes at the Delegates Meeting. It includes MAL voting rights and the DENCO amendment.

Matt,

Could you briefly explain how you are going to incorporate the DenCo Amendment, which increases the power of the Delegates, with the proposed revised constitution, which eliminates the Delegates? These would appear to me to be mutually exclusive.

In any case, the DenCo Amendment is proceeding toward ratification by the "grass roots" route of Article XVI, Section 1 of the present Constitution, and if ratified by 2/3 of the units will be adopted without the help or hindrance of the Delegates Meeting--assuming the Delegates haven't been eliminated by the time it is ratified.
.

[rideair]

Why are we being told conflicting information about the number of Regions that will come from the New Constitution? One person is saying it will be reduced to 5 Regions saving the WBCCI about 17K a year, another person is saying “no where” has the number of Regions been defined and that is all misinformation?

So Revision Committee, which is it?

Has the Region Reduction wording been used here and at Unit meetings to make people think it’s going to happen, thus getting them to sign on?

Sounds like double talk to me! You got one guy telling one story to get people to sign on and another telling people something else to cover the Committee’s backside.

I’m sure the answer will be, well that’s part of the “Bylaws” which the New Constitution does nothing about that

[RickDavis]

Originally Posted by Nuvite-F

Matt,



In any case, the DenCo Amendment is proceeding toward ratification by the "grass roots" route of Article XVI, Section 1 of the present Constitution, and if ratified by 2/3 of the units will be adopted without the help or hindrance of the Delegates Meeting--assuming the Delegates haven't been eliminated by the time it is ratified.
.

Have any units actually received this amendment and voted on it?
What is the time table?

Haven't seen or heard anything about it from my unit and would like to know if it has been distributed and if we are being kept in the dark (again)

[LI Pets]

Originally Posted by rideair

Why are we being told conflicting information about the number of Regions that will come from the New Constitution? One person is saying it will be reduced to 5 Regions saving the WBCCI about 17K a year, another person is saying “no where” has the number of Regions been defined and that is all misinformation?

So Revision Committee, which is it?

The details of the clubs guidelines are in the bylaws it's unfortunate you are being obtuse over that fact.

But you cannot change the Bylaws unless the changes are consistent with the constitution.

Revising the constitution FIRST allows for significant changes in the Bylaws to allow for the kind of governance we want to see changed.

If you looked at it as a book the constitution is the table of contents and the bylaws the chapters?

It is a settled issue that regions will be reduced, that was announced at the mid winters.

The number that is most discussed is 5, which is where the $17K saving are calculated.

What you should be discussing is how to have member input not only in the constitution, which the Denco idea will not give you, but member input in the bylaws.



.

[rideair]

Rick,

From what I've been told, it has been sent out for the Units to vote on. They doubt though, all the responses would be back in time for the Delegates meeting this year.

[mbmbstreamer]

The GA Unit change removes direct voting, except for MALs. It retains the Delegates' meeting and gives that body the authority identified in the DenCo Amendment.

Our Unit received the DenCo Amendment and it is on our Agenda for September.

[rideair]

No Bob,

I fully know and understand, where things are controlled and by whom within the WBCCI Constitution and the WBCCI Bylaws, thus is the reason why I know you have been misleading people with the 17k savings that will be had if the membership passes the “New Constitution”.

At least another person had the honesty to admit the numbers of Regions were not defined in the New Constitution and anyone saying it was, was providing misinformation and misleading the membership, which I guess would be you!

And now you’re stating:

Revising the constitution FIRST allows for significant changes in the Bylaws to allow for the kind of governance we want to see changed.

The above statement along with others you have made would lead most to think by passing the New Constitution is going to allow the membership the ability to change the WBCCI “Bylaws”. You and I both know in its current form “IT DOES NOT”. So when you say these things here and at Unit business meeting you are very much “misleading” the membership on how they should vote. If the some of the proposed amendments are not included in the final version, the IBT still retains “FULL” control of the WBCCI “Bylaws” and you know it!

Just be open and honest about it and admit it, instead of playing word games with everyone that is misleading not only the membership, but the leadership as well.

[LI Pets]

The Metro NY amendment or one like it would need a majority vote to give member control of the bylaws.

Who would not vote for that?

[rideair]

Still can't admit it can you?

You know I'm right! Come on, I'll say it with you,

"Paul, you are correct, the New Constitution as written by the Revision Committee left all the power to created, change, delete the WBCCI "Bylaws" with the "IBT". We can only "hope" since the Revision Committee "made a mistake" in writing that area of the New Constitution, the membership at the Delegates meeting can amend it to give greater control to the membership. If that does not happen, "you are correct", all control remains with the "IBT" in regards to the WBCCI "Bylaws".

It's OK Bob, I know lots of men that cannot admit they are wrong about something. But I know you're enough of a man to do it, are you not?

I just wonder if the Revision Committee didn't get this so very important part right, where else are there problems?

[Nuvite-F]

Originally Posted by RickDavis

Have any units actually received this amendment and voted on it?
What is the time table?

Haven't seen or heard anything about it from my unit and would like to know if it has been distributed and if we are being kept in the dark (again)

Rick,

The DenCo amendment package has been sent by first class mail to unit presidents. The date on Cindy Reed's cover letter is May 20, which I presume constitutes the official date of distribution. If the amendment is ratified by 2/3 of the units within one year of distribution to the unit presidents it is adopted. (Assuming the present Constitution survives until then.) Since it went out too late for most units' spring business meetings, I presume that they will vote on it this fall.
.

[RickDavis]

Originally Posted by Nuvite-F

Rick,

The DenCo amendment package has been sent by first class mail to unit presidents. The date on Cindy Reed's cover letter is May 20, which I presume constitutes the official date of distribution. If the amendment is ratified by 2/3 of the units within one year of distribution to the unit presidents it is adopted. (Assuming the present Constitution survives until then.) Since it went out too late for most units' spring business meetings, I presume that they will vote on it this fall.
.

Is this package be posted anywhere? I would like a chance to read it with out waiting for the info on the unit level.

[RickDavis]

Originally Posted by RickDavis

Is this package be posted anywhere? I would like a chance to read it with out waiting for the info on the unit level.

Thanks John,
No more than posted the request, checked my mail, and there it was

[bugdoc]

Originally Posted by rideair

Why are we being told conflicting information about the number of Regions that will come from the New Constitution? One person is saying it will be reduced to 5 Regions saving the WBCCI about 17K a year, another person is saying “no where” has the number of Regions been defined and that is all misinformation?

So Revision Committee, which is it?

Has the Region Reduction wording been used here and at Unit meetings to make people think it’s going to happen, thus getting them to sign on?

Sounds like double talk to me! You got one guy telling one story to get people to sign on and another telling people something else to cover the Committee’s backside.

I’m sure the answer will be, well that’s part of the “Bylaws” which the New Constitution does nothing about that

The proposed revision Article XII, Sec. 1 is what is proposed and contains no mention of a number of Regions/Areas. The IBT has had discussions about changing the number of Regions, but all the revision does is establish the IBT as the organizer of Regions/Areas.

In fact the Bylaws would establish the procedure for how Regions/Areas would be created and or changed. You do not want to establish a number for Regions/Areas in the constitution because if conditions and/or demographics change you would have to have a constitutional amendment to increase or decrease the number.

Tom

[dwightdi]

Putting everything in to the Bylaws, without the Denco amendment, leaves everything up to the new reduced sized IBT which is dominated by the EC5. That allows the club to be more responsive but without oversight by the members. EC has always been dominated by: Military, law enforcement, and academia. Very few with marketing or business experience make it to the IBT or EC. The club seniority system favors those with early retirement and pensions. There is a broader experience base in the general membership and I feel the club would benefit, if they have a say in how things are run.

[rideair]

Bugdoc,

“Thank You” for your open and honest answer based on how the New Constitution is written. I’ve been trying to tell the very same thing to a member of the Revision Committee that has been going around provide misleading information on this subject to those here and at WBCCI Unit membership meetings in an effort to gather support for the New Constitution. This person keep's telling people it will save the club 17K dollars if they vote yes based on the reduction of Regions to the number of five which is clearly not in this document.

Either this member is purposely providing misinformation in an effort to mislead the membership or is uneducated on the very document that he was to have helped write!

I ask to you try to educate this individual for they will not listen to anyone here about this subject and in an effort to stop them from continuing to mislead and misinform the membership of the WBCCI

Again, THANK YOU!!

[LI Pets]

Stop with this miss information, misleading accusations.

My opinion is there will be 5 and I'm sticking to it.


.

[bugdoc]

Originally Posted by dwightdi

Putting everything in to the Bylaws, without the Denco amendment, leaves everything up to the new reduced sized IBT which is dominated by the EC5. That allows the club to be more responsive but without oversight by the members. EC has always been dominated by: Military, law enforcement, and academia. Very few with marketing or business experience make it to the IBT or EC. The club seniority system favors those with early retirement and pensions. There is a broader experience base in the general membership and I feel the club would benefit, if they have a say in how things are run.

You will have no argument from me on this issue and that is why the committee has made it a point to have the membership look at the revision and develop amendments to allow for that level of oversight.

Tom

[bugdoc]

Originally Posted by rideair

Bugdoc,

“Thank You” for your open and honest answer based on how the New Constitution is written. I’ve been trying to tell the very same thing to a member of the Revision Committee that has been going around provide misleading information on this subject to those here and at WBCCI Unit membership meetings in an effort to gather support for the New Constitution. This person keep's telling people it will save the club 17K dollars if they vote yes based on the reduction of Regions to the number of five which is clearly not in this document.

Either this member is purposely providing misinformation in an effort to mislead the membership or is uneducated on the very document that he was to have helped write!

I ask to you try to educate this individual for they will not listen to anyone here about this subject and in an effort to stop them from continuing to mislead and misinform the membership of the WBCCI

Again, THANK YOU!!

if my memory serves me right it has been proposed to reduce the number of Regions and one of the numbers mentioned was 5 and yes, that would save about 17K per year. However, as I stated earlier the actual number of regions is not something in the constitution.
What the IBT will do in regard to the number of Regions/Areas is not the issue here. That will be decided at some future date and if the revision is approved using the guideline in Article XII, Sec. 1.

[rideair]

Bugdoc,

Again, "Thank You" for saying the truth. So by passing the New Constitution it does not save the club 17K a year (as some would "lead us to believe" based on "their opinion") it does.

And since the number of Regions (as written) is in control of the IBT in the New Constitution, there's nothing to say they will/won't reduce the number to five (once again as some would "lead us to believe" they will "based on their opinion") or it could be something they slowly put in place over a few year period. At this point, no one really knows what/when the IBT "may" decide to do something in regards to the number of Regions.

For someone to go out and speak as if this is happening especially since they are a Revision Committee member and it's all "based on their opinion" and not what is actually in the document, if people knew about this they might think is was a little "deceptive" on the Revision Committees part.

Just want to make sure the correct information is out there!